Ryan McBeth - Intelligence Analyst, Novelist, Content Creator

Ryan and I discuss current events as we tackle the tensions in the Middle East, influencers, Revisionist History, Ukraine, and China's ultimate goal. This a great conversation for anybody wanting an update on the current geopolitical tensions and what to expect next.

Watch the video version of this episode on YouTube and Rumble:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttYJ031gNMU&t=4558s

https://rumble.com/v6w2cjw-ryan-mcbeth-intelligence-analyst-novelist-content-creator.html



Support:

https://buymeacoffee.com/worldablaze

Email: [e-mail]

Web: https://www.worldablazepodcast.com/

X: https://x.com/fontesablaze

Threads:https://www.threads.net/@worldablazewithgeorgefontes

FB: https://www.facebook.com/worldablazewithgeorgefontes

Please like, follow, and share the show!!!!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
All right, Ryan macbeth, thank you for being back on
the show. I feel this is a do over with
you because the first time I try to do a
video episode and I had technical difficulties, so I felt
bad about that, although the audio episode did do pretty
well by the way, But this time I'm glad to
have you on video since I mean, your your audience
based is YouTube and that's what you do. You specialize

(00:25):
and you're making like very informative, awesome videos, and you
do deep dives, and you have a way of explaining
it in a way that people can just understand it
without feeling like they have to go to school. You know.
He basically removed that difficulty out and say, look, let
me break it down easy for you to digest, and
this is what's really going on. So I'm glad to
have this again with you in video format. I just

(00:45):
they need to see you, they really do to get
the whole thing. So since we last talked, the first
time we talked, were talking about was going on in Ukraine.
I do want to get to that because there's new
developments and I know you made a video recently about that,
and then you also made another video about what was
going on with Israel, what's going on in Gaza, and

(01:05):
that whole issue as well. So let's start there, if
you don't mind, Because you know, after the bombing, the
US sent their B two bombers and whatnot, and we
basically bomb nuclear facilities in Iran. I ran, surprisingly to me,
by the way, to me, backed off and I didn't
expect that they would, but they did. They did settle

(01:28):
down a bit. A lot of people were really well
I was. I know you were, because I know you
mentioned it. But people are concerned that there might be
sleeper cells here in the US that might be activated
and retaliation to that. I want to start with that,
with that first, and see what you think, you know,
coming from your perspective, because I don't. I don't believe

(01:48):
it's over. I really don't. I think that that is
a reality that's extremely plausible. I believe that that is
a thing that we will have to face. And I
have done the data. I've done the dive Inpu off
the border, and I know that this year alone, at
least until May, there was about seven hundred and fifty
two or somewhere around there. I don't have the exact
but it was like seven fifty two in terms of

(02:11):
terrorists that they knew about that they detained when I
broke it down, was enough to put fifteen terrorists in
every state of the United States of America. And that's
not counting the ones they don't know about. So what
do you think about that situation? So it would be concerned?
Should the average American citizen be vigilant, be watching out
for that or at least have an idea that, yeah,
it could go bad.

Speaker 2 (02:34):
So well, that's a tough one because it feels like
I'm in two thousand and two. Right, are we are
we red? Are we yellow? Or we blue? Or we green?
Is it a high alert day? Is it a low
alert day? Right? That's a really good question. You know,

(02:54):
I don't think the average American should be concerned in
the sense that there's really not a lot you can
do to prevent it. But in general, the security services
of the US need to be concerned about it, mainly because,
and I don't want to get into politics, but for

(03:18):
about four years our borders were essentially wide open. We
don't necessarily know who's here, and instead of you know,
arresting people at home depot, maybe we should be kind
of looking for bad guys. I think kind of the
problem here is that arresting people at home depot is
good for the president's base, and arresting bad guys is

(03:41):
hard and takes time. Right, you don't have that immediate payoff,
So it's kind of easy to see what someone might
might choose to do, even though finding the bad guys
could eventually stops for a teris incident. When it comes
to Iran, I think I don't want to say they've
learned their lesson, because they haven't learned their lesson. They're

(04:07):
in a weird place right now. We can get into
that when it comes to funding and how they're going
to rebuild their military. But essentially, I would if I
were part of the security services, I would be concerned
about a terist start within the United States that might
not activate now but could activate in the future. So

(04:30):
the average person knows security services, yes.

Speaker 1 (04:32):
Right, I feel the same way. I just well, I'm
agreeing with you, But there's also that side of me
that is like, well, I'm a civilian, like, what's the
possibility what might I have to go through if that
did come to it? And interestingly enough, you know, we
had the instant Colorado where you know, we had the

(04:53):
extremists that burned a few Cherish people, right, and then
they recently all so arrested a few Iranians that they
I don't know the exact details, but they're said to
be terrorists or non terroists that they deported. That was
also just just happened recently. So yeah, it is a
real thing. But I understand what you're saying. You know,

(05:14):
that's that's for security forces to deal with, and they
should be dealing with that. So in your opinion, maybe
we should just you know, hey, be aware, but move on,
live on, right.

Speaker 2 (05:24):
Yeah, I mean, God, again, it sounds like it's it's
two thousand and two. If we don't just continue to
live our lives, terrorists win, right, right. And I even
remember when I want to say it was in god,
November October of two thousand and one, President Bush said

(05:47):
go buy something. Stop watching television and go to the
store and buy something. And I remember only I was
dating this for all the time, and I went and
I bought her like a six hundred dollars eleven jacket.
You know, I did my part for the economy, you know,
because like our economy was actually suffering because people were
hiding inside their homes watching the news.

Speaker 1 (06:08):
Right, they were, they were they they weren't outdoors.

Speaker 2 (06:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (06:12):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (06:12):
There was a great South Park episode about that where
the I think Randy is sitting on the couch and
his eyes are just wide and how like, and uh yeah,
I mean it's we have to live our lite. Ye,
fair enough. If we live in fear, then the terrorists
really do win.

Speaker 1 (06:31):
Yeah, hence terrorism, right yeah, okay, fair enough on that.
What about what about your thoughts on what's going on
in Gaza? I mean, it's we're getting really into what
are getting close to two years or so or about
two years correct, so we're run there? What what is

(06:53):
what is your thoughts on on how that is being
handled by Israel at the moment. And the reason I
asked as we because the sentiment is a lot of
people will agree that they had a right to do
what they had to do. I mean, I saw your
video where you said you didn't forget October seventh. I
didn't either. Most people shouldn't have forgot about that, do
you think in your in your opinion and this isn't

(07:14):
this is just an opinion opinion spot, but do you
think Israel is going a little too far or are
they trying to deal with the situation where it's a
matter of geography because it's not a very big place,
not a very big place for you know, Hamas, for example,
to spread out and hide. And I've seen that they're
pretty much just using the people as shields and they're

(07:36):
basically their captain. They can't necessarily leave either. But at
the same time, do you believe Israel should probably try
a different tactic. Are they going a bit too far
at this point or are they just doing what they
have to do.

Speaker 2 (07:48):
So one of the things that Israel has done is
they've started to create a militious and these militias are
made up of Palestinians who no longer want Hamas in charge,
and they give them guns and they say, okay, get
at it, because you know, these guys, they know where

(08:10):
the hostages are. They no, they know where Hamas is located.
So it's one of those things where it's like, all right,
you know, this is kind of how we have to
do this. And some of these these guys, they're honestly
got criminal gangs, right, they're criminal gangs. But again, to
kind of go back to the era of Donald Rumsfeld.

(08:32):
You go to war if the army have not the
army you want or you wish you had at a
later date. So what choice do you have, right they
you know, those are the allies that are willing to fight,
So I guess we kind of have to stick with
those allies. So they're doing that. They are getting aid in,

(08:52):
which is good. I believe they control about sixty to
sixty five percent of Gaza and they will ideally that
the ceasefire is coming up. Supposedly there may be a
ceasefire soon where most will return. I believe, Oh my,

(09:13):
this is kind of put me on the on the spot.
I believe there are forty remaining hostages and twenty two
I think are still alive. Something like that. There's fifty
hostages remaining and we know that twenty two are still alive.
So you know, I believe the ceasefire gives ten hostages back.

(09:37):
And I can't even imagine what condition the hostages are, right,
I mean, it must be absolute hell on earth, right,
because God knows where they're getting fed, right, Like, where
are these people getting food to feed these hosages? So
they must be at the point of starvation. Right, No,

(09:59):
that's not.

Speaker 1 (10:00):
You're not in good shape whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (10:02):
Yeah, they can't be, but they can't.

Speaker 1 (10:04):
You dressed this a little bit. But what about what
about what's going around mostly on social media or you know,
we are the media now, right, social media? But what
about what was being said of Israel willingly holding back supplies,
right and aid and killing people who are trying to

(10:24):
get aid? Because from the reports I've seen, and you
know way more than I do. You have more access,
but from the reports that I've seen, it's it's really
not necessarily the case. It's Hamas intercepting a lot of
these you know, a lot of this aid and then
trying to redistribute or sell it back to their own people. Yeah,
so how much of it is true that Israel is
actually doing this versus it's just propaganda being spread by Hamas?

Speaker 2 (10:49):
That's uh, that's an excellent question. And uh, you know,
I got to tell you that in some cases, if
if Israelies are rushed by people and they feel threatened,
they're going to open fires. Right, That's just kind of
the way it is. If you feel threatened, then well
you gotta do what you gotta do to stop the threat.

(11:13):
That being said, you know, for the most part, Israel
is getting aid in. It seems like it is mostly successful.
I want to say it's about one hundred and fifty
trucks per day roughly. But one of the issues is
the security situation. That's why you want to work with
these Palestinians. The criminal gangs who will hopefully take that

(11:36):
food and distribute it. Now they're probably distributing it in
a way that makes their gang more powerful. That one
of the big issues that a lot of people don't
talk about. This is actually the case in Africa as well,
is you know, we say Palestinians, but there are tribes

(11:57):
within Palestinians, and I'm trying to I'm actually trying to
google it right now. All the but like you know,
there's there's different plans and we tend to think of, oh,
here's Palestinians. We tend to think of Arabs in general.
There's Arabs, but there's different plans and factions and families

(12:21):
within those societies. And that's why, like democracy doesn't always
work quite right because like let's say you get hired
onto the police force, You're going to try to get
your cousin hired. He's part of your plan, he's part
of your family. And that's how you end up with
a mostly Shia police force in Iraq. Right, That's just

(12:44):
kind of how that part of the world works because
a lot of it is still tribal, right, and we
just don't have any concept of that inside the United States.

Speaker 1 (12:53):
No, we don't. I was trying to look it up
while you're talking. I can't. I can't find like a
definite number. But it does does echo exactly what you're saying.
A lot of it is made up by extended families
throughout the.

Speaker 2 (13:03):
Generation Sucsans was. Yeah, there was exact sorts of plans,
and you know, and this happened in Afghanistan. Didn't happen
to me personally, but I know a guy. I know
a guy right who who said that they built a
like a water uh, like a irrigation system for this

(13:26):
one town, and this other town went and blew it
up because like they thought they should get it first.
And it's like we, you know, and yeah, these tribal politics, man,
you know, like and we kind of thought like, all right, well,
we're gonna go to Afghanistan, We're gonna create Jeffersonian democracy,

(13:47):
and you know, we just kind of ran into that
tribal issue. You know, for the longest time. You know,
Ahmad Karzai was essentially mayor of Kabble, right, he was president,
but he was Breck. You step outside of Cobble, you
might as well be stepping back into the year two
thousand while over the year seven hundred, depending on the

(14:08):
definition you want to go through here. Yeah, but yeah,
the tribal thing is it's just not something that that
we can ignore and uh, it's uh, it's something that
we have to think about whenever dealing with these societies
where when we look at it and go, well, we

(14:28):
gave you this freedom, how come you're not well because
you put this other tribe in charge, not my tribe,
so I have to fight this other tribe. God's Yeah.

Speaker 1 (14:37):
Our misunderstanding of the of the region and its history,
as just as you said, between tribes has been an issue.
But I'm going to I'm going to get to some
before we move on. I'm going to get to something
that that touches on because you know, you mentioned Afghanistan,
like when when we went in there around two thousand

(14:58):
and one, right, or War on Terror but before that,
we helped to supply the rebels and help push back
against the Soviets at that time. And a lot of
people don't even know this, but Afghanistan they went through
a period where they were literally a communist country. I
was backed by the Soviets before the Soviets invaded in
seventy eight or seventy nine. So and before that, they

(15:21):
weren't even in Islama State. They were a monarchy. They
ran by, you know, under the rule of a monarchy.
You know, at that time, Islam wasn't even a governing body.
It was literally just a religion, you know, and it
was spread out among different tribes.

Speaker 2 (15:32):
But yeah, they're absolutely right, and there are people who
were wearing many skirts and kabble, you.

Speaker 1 (15:38):
Know, wouldn't But the reason I brought that up is
because you bring up a You brought up Afghanistan, and
the US gets the blame for creating these terrorist organizations
all the time. If it wasn't for US, this wouldn't
have happened. Right, if we didn't back Israel, nobody would
hate Israel or hate the United States, which which is false.

(16:00):
They're still going to have an issue with Israel. They
always have but the reality is, you know, like I
just did a deep dive on this the other day.
Islamic let me correct myself. Extreme Islamist terrorism has been
around in that region for thirteen hundred years literally, and
it's not a new concept. And primarily it was terrorism

(16:23):
against other Muslims. It wasn't about being against the West.
It was about power and control, subjecting the other people
that they believe didn't hold up or lived to the
standards of Islam, at least to their extreme view of
it anyway. So it's a long history of terrorism and
a religious war within the people that literally practiced the

(16:48):
same religion, which is crazy. And you know, we always
see in the media how the Western powers are to
blame for the situation. The United States is to blame,
not We're not infallible at all. We did things that
we probably shouldn't have. We don't have a full understanding
of why we should be there. We just knew that, hey,
we're going to spread democracy and free the people. But
there was way more to the story than just that.

(17:09):
So it's it's like, what do you say to those
who always always believe that we should just not ever
get involved, Should we not ever involved, or we are
we just perpetuating perpetuating the problem, or is it something
that we really should always have a bit of a
hand in to make sure it doesn't get too out
of control as far as our interests are concerned, or

(17:30):
maybe in the world's interest.

Speaker 2 (17:32):
Well, the question kind of comes up as before we
get involved, what is the definition of when okay? And
that's I did a video about that. Essentially it was
about how how Vietnam can kind of parallel what the
conflict with China might look like in the sense that

(17:54):
if we go into Taiwan without a full understanding with
but win actually means we're gonna have a lot of
trouble because the Yeah, the idea behind Robert McNamara during
Vietnam was well, we're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna apply

(18:16):
graduated pressure until they realize that all right, well we
probably can't win against the United States, so we're just
gonna come to the peace table. And that didn't seem
to work, right, like you know Vietnam, you know, Vietnam
just are oh, we can wait these guys out. That's
exactly what they did, right, So yeah, you know it's

(18:42):
by that that's a. I think before getting involved any place,
we should kind of get that definition of win, Like
what does definitely what what does win actually look like?
If you if you take a look at the Huthies,
what does win mean? Does it mean regime change? Does
it mean the who aren't capable of launching attacks against

(19:03):
the against shipping in the Red Sea anymore? Does it
mean treading them to the point where the loyalists I
used to say the loyalists, but the people in the
western half of the Yemen would be able to actually

(19:25):
fight back against the hoo Thies because right now, Yemen's
kind of a fractured state. The Hoopies are just one tribe, right,
they are a tribe that are inside of Yemen, and
you know they were able to take over a good
portion of the western half. So what does win mean? Right?
So that's kind of the direction that you should probably

(19:47):
go in. It's before you get involved in any kind
of conflict to figure out what win actually means.

Speaker 1 (19:53):
So literally, a better understanding of the area in the situation,
Like what's the impact of our involvement?

Speaker 2 (19:59):
Right?

Speaker 1 (20:00):
Yeah, I get where you're coming from. As far as
what is a win? I mean, it's basically defining what
the mission is, right and why are we here? Really,
I don't think we ever know the whole story. But
at the same time, I mean, I just I guess
it's really about do you do you believe that? Not
that I wouldn't say the world, it's it's more like media, right,

(20:24):
there's this rhetoric in this, this whole movement of you know,
America bad, anti America, America needs to be dismantled, America
needs to go away because everything we do just makes
the world turn to shit. And I don't believe that
at all. I really don't. So I want to get
your opinion on that, and you know where that's coming from,
I mean, outside of obvious propaganda that's being spread to

(20:45):
divide us. What do you think about what's going on
right now with that, with that push for that talking
point about America just being the enemy of the world,
or rather every time we get involved, we just create
a worse situation.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
Boy, that's a very good question, you know, I think. Yeah,
back after the terrorist attacks, one of the excuses we
kind of had was, well, they hate our freedoms, and
I think that some people they they look at their

(21:21):
government and they go like, man, my government is a
government for the people in charge. Right, They don't think
like you look at an Arab spring, Well, how did
Arab spring start? Well, it's started because there was a
fruit cart vendor who didn't have the money to pay

(21:42):
for a license for his fruit cart. And he also
didn't have the money to pay for a bribe to
this policewoman who kept harassing him. Right, and so what
does this guy do? Well, he sells fruit illegally and
then the police come and smashes fruit cart. Now, then
he goes and sets himself on fire in protest. Right. So,

(22:04):
I think that you have people who they don't understand
why their government treats them the way they do. And
they look at America and it's this amazing kind of
why does ever want to come here? They hate us
so much? But I would bet you if you went
to an average Palestinian and said would you like to
come to America, They'd be on the next fricking flight
as long as they can bring their family with, right, Right,

(22:27):
they like we there is this magical part of America where,
for the most part, we really do live in a security.
We live in a society where we do generally follow laws.
Most people do pay their taxes. Most police aren't really corrupt,
at least not to the extent that you know, you

(22:47):
can pay a bribe to get out of the ticket
or something like that. Right, Like, I can't even imagine
what would happen to me if I tried. You know,
if the police came and I held out one hundred
dollars bill, probably wouldn't go, right. They probably arrestd me
for for trying to bribe them. Right right now, I'm
sure there is corruption, right we saw that. He saw

(23:07):
that in New York, Yes, with Mary Eric Adams, who like,
let me do all these favors for Turkey, and you know,
I get to fly to Turkey for fifty dollars whatever,
you know, Like for Menendez, that was always a good one,
Robert Menz It's.

Speaker 1 (23:23):
Like, I mean, we'll always be corrected bars and it's
never to the level that we see in these other
third work countries for example, right.

Speaker 2 (23:30):
Now, not even close. Like if I want to start
a business here in the US, I have a I
have an Indian friend of mine and he was telling
me how great the US is, How like this guy
he moved from India to Texas and like now he
wears a cowboy hat, he owns a gun, he's driving
a Ford f one fifty. Like America has this way

(23:52):
of just turning evil into Americans, right, And he told me,
like how like in India, if you want to start
a busines, you got to go pay a bribe to someone,
and then you go to another agency and you gotta
pay another bribe, and everything's set up so that everyone
kind of gets their palms greased on the way to
starting this business. And in America, if I want to
start a business, I literally go on to the State

(24:14):
of Maryland website and I pay fifty dollars and I
start an LLC.

Speaker 1 (24:19):
Literally, just go online, you can start one.

Speaker 2 (24:21):
And that I think that is for the most part,
the engine of our growth, the engine of our success.
It's that people can just you want to start a business,
you want to start cleaning business, You just all right,
you'll get some fabulous so get some rags, get some buckets,
form the LLC poof you just started a business. And

(24:44):
I think that people in some other countries they look
at America and they don't they don't get it. They
don't understand, like, how come they're successful, but we're not.
And they may realize like, oh, it's because our leaders
are corrupt, but they can't fix that. So it's just
kind of it might be easier to blame America of

(25:05):
your problems than it is to kind of look internally right,
because you can't fix that. The only way you fix
that is the way the Syrians did. Now, a lot
of Assyrians died to make that happen.

Speaker 1 (25:19):
The thing with the well, so I see where you
come from. I agree with that. But the reality is
the Middle East is always, always had had some kind
of conflict, and I know, as you stated before, a
lot of it is tribal. It's like that area has

(25:41):
never well, we consider it modernization, right, because Western culture
is just completely different. We always look at them as
not progressing there. They seem to be very traditional in
their ways after all these years, and and what happens
is from what I see, I may be wrong, and
that's why you're here, you know, correct me, But what
I see is as soon as as soon as one

(26:04):
faction rises right on behalf of the people, it's always
starts out as on behalf of the people by the people,
and they want to overthrow the regime that becomes authoritarian
or dictator like, and then they themselves become the same
thing they overthrew. It's almost like once they have power,
it becomes so infectious that they just keep repeating the cycle.

(26:24):
What is your opinion on why that happens. Is it
literally just always because it's a tribal thing, or is
it because they're they're just they're just so used to
not being able to have any kind of power or
control whatsoever, that once they have it, it's like it
just gets to their head. They just can't they can't stop.
They must take it all out at that point. Well,
that that's a fantastic question. You know, maybe I look

(26:48):
at you, like at George Washington. Probably out of the
smartest thing George Washington ever did was quit after two terms, right, right,
that just kind of set the precedent. And we we've
had this precedent for two hundred and fifty years. While
a little bit less years, we've had this precedent.

Speaker 2 (27:06):
Where for the most part we have this peaceful transition
of power, right and for the most part elected officials
at least they try their best to do the right thing,
you know, at least that they're answerable to their constituents
because if they don't answer to their constituents, they get unelected.

(27:29):
And uh, you know the in in some societies, you
don't necessarily see that they're they're when if you take
a look at sad on the Saints, Iraq, there's only
one party that was the Bath Party, right, and I
guess it was nominally a democracy. I mean I could
say you, I mean you could you could technically iron

(27:55):
as a democracy if you want to get technical. They
do elect their leaders, right, they do that. I think
it's required in their constitution that one Jew and one
Christian be in parliament for representations. They're not. It's not
called the parliament. I can't remember the dar name of

(28:16):
their governance, their governor structure right now. But yeah, so
there's there's that, right, like there are nominally democracies. But
when you get to the point where you can't actually
affect change, I think that that just drives some people
absolutely nuts.

Speaker 1 (28:33):
So it's to me almost like a really it's a
false sense of democracy. I mean, when you have the
same leader year after year after year, I mean some
of these people going twelve years, twenty years, I mean, hell,
Russia's allegedly, you know, they're elected democratically. Putin's been there
for I couldn't even I just been there for so long.

Speaker 2 (28:53):
I I want to say since two thousands now, but
weren't two thousand because he was he was president I
think twice, and then Medev Medievev took over and then
Putin took over again.

Speaker 1 (29:07):
So yeah, but he's been there at least twenty at
least twenty two to twenty somewhere between twenty two twenty
five years that I don't remember the exact date he
became into power, but it's around that. You know, it's
been two decade. Over two decades, right, But we we
see the situation where, you know, these leaders that come
into power, don't they just don't want to relinquish it.

(29:28):
And when the when the when they feel that there's
change in the air, it seems like that's when they
start turning the screw to their own people and then applying,
applying the fear right to keep them in line. And
since you did bring up Iran, so the thing is
the thing we I need to understand about Iran is
they're they're they're their own nation. They do command respect

(29:50):
for who they are there right now, they've been the
leading supporter of terrorism since nineteen eighty four, at least
officially that's how they were labeled, right.

Speaker 2 (30:01):
Since Prizes nineteen seventy nine, well.

Speaker 1 (30:03):
Before, but officially nineteen eighty four. Is when they're like, hey,
you know, these guys are arg just state as supporter
of terrorism?

Speaker 2 (30:11):
Now?

Speaker 1 (30:12):
Is is theirs necessarily? Do you think a religious war?
Or is it just is that just nothing but a
cover for their ultimate goal of being the power in
the region because they used proxies to do their own bidding,
Like they're not directly going out and attacking people and
causing all of this, all of this harm and and

(30:35):
all this chaos. You know, they get they get to
have like the Mafia's that right, the boss would always
have a buffer, so that their buffer has always been,
you know, like these proxies. So how do we how
do we hold a country like that accountable for doing
those things? You can easily deny they never had direct
involvement because they never really did anything except for recently
between what happened with Israel and Iran, you know, with

(30:56):
the bombings and but not the missiles. But before they
weren't always recon fault. So so how should that be approach? Like,
how how were they to be held accountable for their actions?
But at the same time we allow them to thrive
and develop and continue to grow as a society.

Speaker 2 (31:13):
Well, you bomb them. You did exactly what I look.
I've often said, like you got, we got as a nation.
We have to get back to our core competencies. And
we're not very good at nation building, but we are
really good at a bombing piece like that. That's one
of the things where we really excel at. It's been
that way since scott when Reagan operational Dorado Canyon, when

(31:38):
we realized Kadafi was his terrorist leader. Uh. He blew
up uh pan Am he pan Am flight over locker
room in Scotland. He was helping fund the ira He
was helping fund Uh. There was an operation uh to
Iranian affiliated terrorists who blew up a disco in Berlin.

(32:01):
I want to say it was Berlin. They killed a
couple of US service members. There isn't even a situation
where Easter and East Germany they caught some I want
to say it was Iranian terrorists trying to smuggle a
bomb on board and the bomb wasn't for the East
German flight, it was going someplace else, and they're going
to put the bomb on that plane, and the East
Germans turn them in. They don't want those idiots in

(32:23):
their country either, right, you know. But once we bombed,
once we bombed uh Libya, Kadelfi shut up for a
good let's say ten twelve years, yeah, roughly, you know.
And look, the reason Iran uses proxies is that it's cheap,

(32:44):
and that's actually probably one of the reasons why they
lost their air battle against Israel. You know, Iran, they
can't build an aircraft carrier, they can't build an ICBM
and are continental ballistic missile that can reach the United States.
But what they can do is fun terrorist organizations around

(33:08):
the globe that can perform kinetic actions that can give
them leverage over certain areas of the world like Lebanon,
the Houkis, and Yemen Hasblahamas, right, so they can do that.
And what's interesting is that I think that the reason
Iran kind of failed against these Israeli attacks isn't just

(33:32):
the skill of the Israeli air force, which is undeniably skillful,
but they were kind of putting so many eggs in
the IRGC and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard corner basket. They
were funding terrorist organizations all over the world that they
were kind of neglecting the RSH. They were neglecting their

(33:53):
own military, and you can see that just by looking
at their jet fighters. I mean the jet fighters remains
are from the nineteen seventies. I'm sure there's been some upgrades.
And supposedly Iran they want to purchase a couple of
suit thirty four's from Russia, like a deal went through

(34:16):
to purchase these to thirty fours. I think they've got
a single suit thirty four. I think they've got a
single one because Russia is like, yeah, we kind of
need these right now, no surprise, right. And a couple
of years ago, Russia helped Ron launch a satellite and
UH I remember the spy satellite, and they said to
Iran like, we're going to use this for a little while.

(34:37):
Consider it a consider it a feet right, So yeah,
the the UH I think that Iran's way to affect
changes through the proxies, which was cheap. But for every
proxy that you fund with a dollar, it's one less
dollar that you can fund your conventional mil military with

(35:01):
and that's how you get into a situation where you
have this military that is essentially very brittal. Right, they
can't even destroy Israeli planes coming into their own country, right,
they can't launch sorties against Israeli planes that are flying

(35:22):
into their own country. I think Israel established air dominant
and then three to five days to the point where
they're operating during the daytime, which is absolute madness. Yeah,
it's crazy.

Speaker 1 (35:36):
They obviously didn't have any fear of what Iran could do.

Speaker 2 (35:39):
No, No, they didn't have any fear. And that's kind
of not how it's supposed to be. Like, you're supposed
to have air sovereign to be over your own country,
and after three to five days, I believe Iran didn't.
That's a pretty big issue. And that's I think it's
directly because they funded their proxies so much. There's essentially

(36:01):
no money left over for their conventional forces, the surface,
their missile forces, their air force. So you're you're you're
running how to reduce capacity, and then you actually get
into that fight and now you get smacked around by
a country that's twenty times smaller than you.

Speaker 1 (36:21):
It's right, it's interesting, but you brought up Russia because
the what I've seen, what I've seen happen with Iran,
so out out the gate right, Pakistan is like, oh,
we support Iran and we will back them and if
we have to, we'll launch a nuclear weapon if we
need to. So they Iran has these I don't even

(36:44):
know if they're real allies or pseudo allies because Russia
is supposed to be an ally. But what we've seen
is we've never really seen Russia really come to their
need necessarily. I know, Iran helped Russia in the in
the Ukraine War by sending them like I think it
was like technology like drones, different things.

Speaker 2 (37:00):
Yeah, sad drones, okay.

Speaker 1 (37:01):
And and then same thing with China. China supposed he
you know, says hey, they also stand by Iran, but
China doing what China does. They haven't really done much
or said anything outside of just saying we support a run.
After the bombings, everyone got quiet. So I don't know
if that's a testament to still, you know, how strong

(37:23):
the US really is in the world stage that people
actually saw that, Okay, we're not we're not sleeping anymore.
We will take care of things if we have to,
or if Iran their true colors just came out and
this whole thing has just been you know, one giant
charad really, you know, in terms of what Iran can
really do and what power they really have.

Speaker 2 (37:43):
Yeah, I mean, look, if you're Russia, what exactly are
you going to do right now to support Iran? Much
like that's that mean, like can you send aircraft? But
you kind of need those aircraft right, So oh what
do you do? Because I don't really have an answer.

Speaker 1 (38:03):
Oh no, no, I get it. It's just it just seems
it just seems like they don't really have the allies
they think they do. You know, as soon as as
soon as the US did step into back Israel, which
we always do, which it's gonna be another question for you,
but it seemed like everybody just kind of stepped back.
They just didn't want to get involved anymore. In my opinion,

(38:26):
I think China is just watching all these conflicts, and
just while they're doing that, they're testing the waters over
there with Taiwan. Sorry Taiwan. I don't know why I
said Taiwan. So Taiwan and also you know, also the
Philippines and just recently, they basically laser targeted a German
I think with a helicopter or some military craft when

(38:46):
they were having an exercise out there. So to me,
I think China is saying what people want to hear,
while at the same time plotting to do what they
want to do in the region. And I mean, I
know they're end goal is to eventually take Taiwan. But
you know, if Russia You're correct, obviously, it's like they
don't have any means to really separate and and fight

(39:09):
two wars. They just can't. I mean, they're barely even
able to handle what's going on in Ukraine right now,
and that's a much smaller country, you know, So I
get you now. As far as Israel and Irando, I
always ask I've asked a question by you know, two
other guests that I've had recently, and do you do

(39:30):
you believe at some point that Israel needs to stand
on their own without knowing that the USA is going
to step in?

Speaker 2 (39:40):
Hmm.

Speaker 1 (39:41):
I know we're allies. I'm not saying we shouldn't help
our allies, but there have been situations where and historically
that they they have done They've done things that have
really made it hard, right, especially for US. I mean,
if you look at the geopolitical relationships, like what if
we're in negotiation with another country or we're trying to
do something to where we can improve relations, and then all

(40:02):
of a sudden, Israel's another war with somebody you know,
or there's another conflict. How do you feel about that
or at least your opinion on that situation.

Speaker 2 (40:12):
Well, usually Israel doesn't necessarily start, right, you could say that,
you know, one war that Israel I'm really trying to.
I mean, really the only war that hasn't really started
was nineteen forty eight, right, so kind of like what
do you know, even the Siini can't say was the

(40:36):
Siani campaign? Was that? I think that was instigated by
Egypt and they were like, well, let's just keep going.
You know, let's say when the Egyptian forces are collapsing,
let's just keep going. You know, might as well keep
going here. So I usually it seems like other people

(40:58):
kind of roll in and and they cause trouble with Israel,
and Israel decides to respond, and that's when they have
to step in. Now, for the most part, Israel does
and on its own when they need a little extra help.
They can call the US for the most part. Like
you look at Israel's air force and they were able

(41:19):
to do a lot with I think it's eleven fighter
eleven fighter squads, right, I think it's three F thirty fives,
three F sixteen eyes well one of sixteen e welling laughs,
F fifteen. I I think they have two F fifteen

(41:42):
c's these squads A fifteen C. I'm trying to do
this memory, but I think it's eleven squad.

Speaker 1 (41:50):
Yeah, but it's not a large, not a very large.

Speaker 2 (41:54):
Passive, but it's it's a respectable air force for the
Reeds veritably, Yeah, paratively, and you know, like they can
usually handle themselves. It's kind of when things got out
of control that the US gets called in and you know,
normally they don't start it, they shut us all, finished it.

Speaker 1 (42:14):
Well, history is shown they yeah, technically typically do not
Typically in tech you don't start it. You're correct.

Speaker 2 (42:22):
Sixty seven sixty seven is a real startup, but only
because they saw the Egyptians building up on the border. Right.
They essentially took out the Egyptian air force in one day.

Speaker 1 (42:34):
Right, Yeah, they're they're a powerful nation for their size.
But it's still do you think we should always have
to step in, because that's that's been that's been the
rhetoric going around. You know, it's as if we shouldn't
support Israel anymore. I think if we're no longer their ally,
we lose a major position there in terms of an

(42:54):
ally military position, everything.

Speaker 2 (42:58):
A major technical position. Same.

Speaker 1 (43:00):
Like.

Speaker 2 (43:01):
Look one of the reasons Israel and the United States
when it came to Oman just their guitar guitar a
couple of weeks ago, when around launched all dismissiles, We've
gotten all that data from Ukrainian intercepts, Like whenever Ukraine
intercepts a Russian missile with a Patriot, we get that data, right,

(43:26):
So we got a heck of a lot of data
on the performance of the Patriot and the performance of
the Patriot in Israel. We got a heck of a
lot of data on that, right. One of the things
that Israel helped create with US money was the iron
Dome syst Well, now we have access to that tech.

(43:47):
You know, iron Dome really isn't that useful for us,
but we can use some of that tech to develop
other systems that might be useful in the future. Another
good example is the Trophy system. Trophy system is on
I want to say, one hundred and fifty US tanks
that are in Germany. Trophy system is kind of like

(44:08):
an iron dome for tanks intercepts incoming rockets. Right, So
we have this this tech transfer with with Israel that
would be lost if they were no longer allies. So
I mean, when you essentially have a country that's in
a very bad part of the world's kind of willing
to test out some of your weapons for you and

(44:29):
bring back the data, wellck, why not do that, right?

Speaker 1 (44:33):
And then we would also lose some of that intelligence
as well.

Speaker 2 (44:35):
No, yeah, absolutely so. And plus Israel is a democracy.
You know, we need to be able, we need to
support democracies around the globe.

Speaker 1 (44:47):
Yeah, you know, I just want to clarify that I
that question wasn't to put you on the spot and
have you say Israel bad.

Speaker 2 (44:53):
I was just want a.

Speaker 1 (44:54):
Dropeena because you know, there is as I stated earlier,
as a sentiment that akabad right where the for the
cause of all iron the world? And then now it's like, well,
let's not support Israel anymore. Let's just let them do
whatever they got to do and stand on their own
and then you know, well, at the same time support Ukraine,
which was never really an ally. But you know, with

(45:16):
that situation, you know, we don't want to see the
little guy get taken over by the larger aggressor right
for no reason. So it's just like this whole, this
whole thing right now, with the way the media is
pushing their talking points in their narrative, it's like we're
living in an upside down world. And I don't I
don't know where it's coming from.

Speaker 2 (45:36):
It.

Speaker 1 (45:36):
I don't know who's who is behind this propaganda. But
you know, even on us soil, we have you know,
people that are marching for Hamas. I mean, I get
supporting the people of Palestine are stuck in the middle
of the actual you know, people civilians that are that
are being killed because of the decisions made by Hamas.
I understand that, but I don't understand how we can

(45:59):
get behind to rist organizations to say no, they're actually
the good guy. You know, it's America that's bad. We're
the reason that all this is happening.

Speaker 2 (46:07):
I had a whole theory about that.

Speaker 1 (46:09):
Okay, Well, I just won Daro's coming from it is.

Speaker 2 (46:13):
I think I honestly, I think one of the reasons
that the US are college students in the United States
got so involved with the whole conflicting gaza was that,
you know, these are students who for four years three

(46:34):
four years, three years at least, they couldn't go to class,
they couldn't wear masks, they couldn't go out on the
date with a girl. Then all of a sudden, like
here's this opportunity to meet other people in real life
on a subject that they're passionate about. I'm kind of
reminded of reminded of my old first sergeant when I

(46:56):
first joined in nineteen ninety four. My first sergeant was
like he told me he was a Vietnam vet. And
this guy said, you know, uh what he used to do.
He used to work at the Pentagon. After work, he
would change into civilian clothes and he would go to
the protests and in civilian clothes and like tell the

(47:17):
girls that he was a soldier. And you know, he
got he got to sleep with all sorts of girls
that way because they thought, like, we're bringing them into
our side. So if you're if you're a kid, if
you're a boy, right, and you know you, uh, you've
never kissed a girl before, and I've been out on
a date with a girl before, and here's an opportunity

(47:38):
to meet girls in real life. You don't have to
worry about a mask, you don't worry about tender and
they're passionate about this thing. Yes, I'll be passionate about
this too. Can we go back to your dorm afterwards? Right?
So I think I and I I I had, though
I don't think I am. I really know, because it's

(47:59):
it's it sounds like a very open and shut thing, right.
It sounds like one of those things where you can
go like, oh, you know, I'll do this thing and
I'll get this girl, and you know, I'll be able
to socialize with people. I'll be able to feel a
part of something. I think a lot of these kids,

(48:20):
you know, if you're if you're wearing a mask in
high school for three years and you can't do organized sports,
so you can't go to homecoming dance because of COVID,
and then you go to college and now you have
all this freedom and look at all the cool kids
are out here protesting. I'm going to go protest as well. Right, Yeah,

(48:41):
I think a lot of it was was just I
don't want to say, and there are some people who
might feel genuinely bad, but I would not be surprised
if there were a lot of kids I did a
whole video about this who just wanted to make friends
and this was just an easy way to do that.

Speaker 1 (49:00):
That's that's yeah, I mean, I'm that can it seems
to track. I have another I have another person that
mentioned that some of this support also is we have,
you know, generations removed from at least the atrocities that
we saw right with September eleventh, that don't understand what

(49:23):
the US went through. And then you know, this new
generation of people, these younger people in their lifetime hasn't
haven't really seen the effects of true terrorism or or
not even not on a broad scale like it used
to be. It never really went away, but it wasn't
as bad now as it used to be until recently.
Now we're looking at this war between you know, Hamas

(49:45):
and Israel, and this is the first time they've been
able to see a conflict like this of this scale,
and they don't know what to make of it. They
don't know how to make the connection as to why
amass is considered bad. You know, who really is Palestine?
Elin's not a nation, you know, they were region. They
were always referred to as a region, a region that
encompassed a lot of other tribes and nations, not nations,

(50:08):
but you know, tribes and other cultures together. It was
always considered region, not a nation. So they don't get that,
they don't understand that, they can't make the connection, so
they just see, oh, this is bad, there's no reason
this war should be happening. And then you also have
Ukraine going on. But it seems like everybody, really the
younger people, really attach themselves to this Palestinian or Palestine

(50:33):
versus Israel hoss Israel war. And I think it's because
they just don't understand or see what is behind it all,
Like what is the true history, not just what they hear,
Because it seems like this is really what pisses me
off lately. Ryan. I don't know if you agree, but
it seems like we're living through a period of revisionist history.
You know, we got like you don't have to say

(50:55):
anything because I know you can't, but I'll just say,
you have guys like this martyr made guy who believe
suddenly that Hitler's a good guy. You know, he wasn't
all that bad and he said a few things, but
all in all, his intent was good. And you know,
Winston Churchill was the bad guy, and if it wasn't
Winston Churchill, we wouldn't have had to go to war
with Germany, et cetera. And it just makes you scratch
your heads, like where is all this revisionist history stuff

(51:16):
coming from? You know, it's really easy to be, you know,
twenty thirty forty years removed from something and then go
back and say, well, it should have been done this way.
You didn't live through it, You didn't understand what was
really happening. So I believe that could also be what's
going on right now. You know, we have a generation
of people that have never really had to deal with
this situation, and right now, with the way social media is,

(51:40):
it's so prevalent you cannot turn it off. You know,
every time you turn your phone on, it's another headline,
it's another picture, it's another video, So that's fake. But still.

Speaker 2 (51:50):
I recall how there is this one college professor of
an interview with him, and he's starting to realize that
a lot of his students have no real concept of
September eleventh, no, no actual concept of what happened that day,
and so he'll actually play the phone calls from the tower,

(52:13):
he play the video footage. He'll show like the horror
of that day, and that kind of brings it home
for a lot of these people who who were hearing
their you know love you know, people call their loved
ones and say goodbye, right leaving a message on an
answering machine, having to say goodbye, which is like, God,

(52:34):
I remember that day. That was a horrible, horrible day. Yeah. Yeah,
that's one of those everybody remembers where they were kind
of day. Everybody, everybody remembers where they were. Yeah, I
got I remember just uh, you know, we were all
like ready to go. Let's go. Let's go kill who

(52:57):
were supposed to kill. I don't know, let's just go.

Speaker 1 (52:59):
It was one of those it didn't matter if you
were in the military or civilian. Everybody was ready to go,
pick up a pitchfork whatever. It was like, Hey, we're
going to defend our soil. Yeah, and I don't know
if we It's just it's just funny how throughout the years,
we just lose that connection, you know, as as being
Americans and being proud of who we are as a people.
And it's sad to see where we're at right now.

Speaker 2 (53:20):
But I don't know.

Speaker 1 (53:22):
I hope, I hope we could turn that around and
bring back the pro American sentiment, not not isolationism by
the way, just being more proud of who we are.
And and I hope that we can understand why things
were done the way they were done. It wasn't all
bad intentions, you know. Oh, and it's a sad thing. Uh.
Let me ask you this question. What's next?

Speaker 2 (53:44):
Man?

Speaker 1 (53:44):
What do you think's next with with Iran and Israel
and where this is going to go?

Speaker 2 (53:49):
Ah, I don't think it's gonna go anywhere. No, No,
you know, both sides are pretty much spent, you know.
They they just don't have the internal resources. That's why
when people said, oh my god, this is gonna be
World War three, it's not. We don't. There's just no

(54:12):
there's no capacity for waging a long war. Now. Granted,
Israel is waging along war inside Gaza, but that's not
as expensive as keeping aircraft running twenty four to seven, right, right,
and you know, Iran doesn't have It's not like they
can sail to Israel and drop the landing ships and invade,

(54:36):
right true, there's no World War three, right, So I
think what happens is both sides kind of take a breather,
they take lessons from that. Iran is probably gonna they
probably have a shopping list, but there's not a lot
of people that can actually fulfill that shopping list. They're

(54:58):
gonna need new surf scare systems, They're going to need
new radar systems, and kind of one of the issues
is that there's just no capacity around the world for
them to gain the systems that they need to defend
their airspace. You look at you look at Russia. You know,

(55:18):
try placing an order for a missile system in Russia
right now, right they're going to fill their orders first. Absolutely,
Try placing a system for a missile system order from
China right now. Well, they're going to fill their orders first.
So who's left.

Speaker 1 (55:32):
Yeah, China is not concerned with anyone else having more
power than that China.

Speaker 2 (55:36):
China is. China's always going to do it's best for China,
and right now it's best for China's manufacturing weapons for
a fight against Taiwan, right right, agree, that's what's best
for China.

Speaker 1 (55:47):
I thought I thought we could have been on the
verge of World War three. And the reason I thought
that was what I kind of mentioned earlier, because you know,
when Pakistan stepped up and they were right away going
and oh, we'll use neicerent weapons that we have to,
we'll do it. And then Russia right away stepped up
and he said, oh, we're behind Iran and in so

(56:08):
Dia China. But you know, it does make sense what
you're saying, because from a financial standpoint, none of them
could could enter into this and have an extended war,
none of them, none of those nations whatsoever. I think
I was more I would think I took it more
seriously just because of what Pakistan said, you know, a

(56:29):
shooting a nuclear weapon off. But who knows. I mean, yeah,
you're probably right. It probably did come down to literally
just finances, like there's just nobody could afford to do it.

Speaker 2 (56:38):
Nobody. Yeah, And I was not actually familiar with with
Pakistan saying they're going to use the nuclear weapon, because
when someone says we're going to use the nuclear weapon,
the next question needs to be okay against whom, Like,
what's the what? What is the I've often said this,

(57:01):
there's really only four cases in what you'd use a
nuclear web, right. That is to establish a breakthrough. Let's
talk about a taxical weapons to establish a breakthrough. That's
a valid use case. You blow up a nuclear weapon
above a troop concentration. You do it as an air bursts.
There's very little ground radiation or very little radio I
could fall out, and you run your troops through that

(57:22):
hole that you made in the front lines. That would
be an ideal weapon for Russia to use against Ukraine
if they had the troops to actually exploit a breakthrough.
There's a second thing, which is defending a breakthrough, like
when Ukraine went into curse, using a nuclear weapon on
Russian taxical nuclear weapon on Russian soil, that would have
been a good use case for using a nuclear weapon, right.

(57:43):
It would have stopped that breakthrough like that, and it
would have been on Russian soil that the world probably
would have been mad, but hey, they blew up their
own country, so that's okay. Right. The third thing is
to use a nuclear weapon against the naval fleet American

(58:05):
carriers in the Atlantic. That is an ideal use case
or a nuclear weapon. The fourth thing is an amphibious landing.
So if Taiwan or China lands on Taiwan using a
nuclear weapon against the amphibious beachhead, that would be an
ideal use case or a nuclear weapon. So when Pakistan
says we're going to use a nuclear weapon against what,

(58:28):
are you going to have exploded over Israel? Good luck
with that?

Speaker 1 (58:30):
No understood? I believe with h No, I'm with you.
Where it came from, you know, it's where it came from.
Was was the belief that when the situation was happening, right,
it was all based allegedly on the fact that Iran
wouldn't come to the table with their nuclear data deal.
We didn't want No, the world does not want them

(58:50):
to have a nuclear weapon or to develop one. So
Pakistan at the time, and a lot of the other
sympathizers of our we're always like, why does Israel he them,
they're not even part of this agreement or this pack,
why do they have nuclear weapons?

Speaker 2 (59:07):
Well, that Israel has a nuclear weapon.

Speaker 1 (59:09):
Right, So that's what that's what the rhetoric was. So
it was it was a response to everything going on
saying if if Israel dares to launch a nucle weapon,
if there's a nuclear weapon launched, we're going to launch
everything we have and back Iran. And and that I
believe that's where that came from. So, I mean, when
a country or nation says, hey, we're going to use

(59:30):
our entire nuclear arsenal if we have to, kind of
makes me, you know, go, hey, well wait a minute.
You know, we might be going a bit too far.
But you know, to your point, you're right, it's like,
who are.

Speaker 2 (59:41):
They gonna do? Yeah, what are they gonna do? Now?
A good use case for a nuclear weapon in Israel's case,
if they have them, might be all right, well, we
want to reach Fourdoh, we can't reach Floridoh, so let's
explod the nuclear weapon groundburst small fifteen twenty kiloton nuclear

(01:00:05):
weapon against Foorid. Oh that'll take out Florida. Would the
world be mad? Probably? But in some ways, like I
think one of the reasons that Israel kind of kind
of I don't want to say they screwed themselves, but

(01:00:25):
when ten days after the ten days after the October seventh,
there was an explosion at the it was the Urbia hospital,
and the New York Times immediately publishes Israel dropped a

(01:00:48):
bomb on this hospital, yes, and so then they and
I like when I saw that, I was like, no,
they did, and I kind of knew why. I watched
the footage and all that and like that that was
than the bomb from Israel. And it was later found
out to be a missile fire by Islamic Jihad that
just kind of fell short. And that that happens. I

(01:01:09):
think twenty percent of all missiles launched against Israel land
inside Gosy.

Speaker 1 (01:01:16):
Never really made it never hit Therom markin.

Speaker 2 (01:01:17):
Oops, right, you know.

Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
And that's that's an interesting thing. Abought the hospitals because
it seems like there are two hundred and something hospitals
in Gaza, you know, I.

Speaker 2 (01:01:31):
Think it's fewer than that.

Speaker 1 (01:01:32):
But well, the way they're reporting it, it's it's it's
just crazy that it seems like every other week there's
a hospital being blown up. And how much of this
is true versus just again propaganda, how much of that
is just you know, trying to win the sympathy of
the world and turn Israel into the big bad enemy.

Speaker 2 (01:01:54):
In some cases, I believe it's been true. I would
have to go overreach each bombing case. But you know,
if Daddy l daddy is in a hospital. Though hospitals
are supposed to be exempt from attack according to the
Geneva Conventions, kind of the issue that you run into
is that if you are hosting troops in there, and

(01:02:16):
I don't mean troops that have been wounded. And you know,
there was a couple of years ago there was an
attack against the hospital and I think it was Amnesty
International said, oh, the Ukrainians were using the hospital as
a best home, and like that's one of those well yeah,

(01:02:37):
like because if you go to the hospital to visit
your buddy, where are you going to eat? You're gonna
eat at the hospital, right like that that's kind of
stretching it as an excuse for attacking the hospital. But yeah,
that just for the most part, you're not supposed to

(01:02:58):
do that. And so if as it is going to
decide to do that, they're going to go over there,
uh there, Oh my god, I can't remember the darn
word for it, but they're going to go over a
procedure to decide how to actually strike this. They're going
to do the weaponearing and say this is affect type
of bomb because Daddy Elbaddie is on the third floor

(01:03:21):
in the fourth room, So we're going to use a
small diameter bomb that will just take out this one room.
So you have to be very aware of how Israel
is actually going to undertake these actions, and so they
might do this, But what was the criteria for striking

(01:03:43):
this particular target.

Speaker 1 (01:03:44):
Yeah, I understand that. I think I think the reason
people are so so peeved about all of it in
terms of because it seems to be indiscriminate. That's you know,
let's just say that's what it is. That's what people
that's what people are gathering about, you know, from what's happening.
Uh and and and the reason it seems this way

(01:04:07):
is because Israel has proven that they can be very
strategic and surgical when they want to be. But when
it comes to Gaza, it's like it's it seems like
they're just leveling the place.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
But a lot of that, a lot of the leveling
is those are bulldozers, Those are D nine bulldozers. So
those aren't necessarily bob buildings. Now, it doesn't make a
difference for the person who's home is destroyed, right, But
if you're in a platoon and you have to clear
a house and you know there's a bad guy in
that house. You're like, well, is this is this bad

(01:04:41):
guy really worth my platoon's life. You might call in
an air strike, or you might say, just get the
dn I in up here. Uh, some of the D
nine bulldozers are actually armored and uh they're remote controls.
So the dnine just comes in, levels the house and
move on to the next house.

Speaker 1 (01:04:57):
So you think a lot of this is is just
a blown out of portion. You know, it's it's all
for just getting eyeballs on news feeds and on social
media posts.

Speaker 2 (01:05:06):
Possibly it works. Yeah, hey, you talked about God. There's
that one guy who's saying Hitler was the good guy. Yeah,
well look, get you on, Tucker Carls. Everybody else says
Hitler is the bad guy, right, So Tucker Carlson, now
I was all right, Well, if I bring on this
guy says Hitler was the good guy, I'm going to
get lots of people watching my show. I'm going to

(01:05:26):
get lots of people talking about my showfa right, And
he's always been fired from every job he's ever had.
He needs news, he needs news, all right, and what's
going to get the views well, talking about how Hitler
is a good guy. Yeah, miss understood.

Speaker 1 (01:05:47):
Yeah, I know there's a lot of guys that are
that are that are taking that stance and again trying
to reread history. But you know that, to me, that's
a whole other conversation. I mean that that's another rabbit
hole that we can dive down. But I just think
it's so ridiculous how people don't see what's going on
and they're just they're just eating it up. They're just

(01:06:07):
eating it up. I mean, it's so easy to do
research these days. It's not like you have to find
the library that might have a specific collection of books anymore.
I mean, the internet is vast. I mean you've got
to vet your sources on the internet, but it's it's
not as hard as it used to be to find information,
you know. So it's as if they just take these
people for their word just because they have a huge

(01:06:27):
following or a podcast that's popular. But you know, nobody
seems to be questioning what they're saying. They're just eating
it up.

Speaker 2 (01:06:36):
Yeah, I mean that that's some of that is some
of that is the attention culture, right, Like you know
when you have when you have some Instagram video, you know,
you're scrolling through this thing. And that's how a lot
of people get their news these days from Instagram. Like
have you ever waked? Like, have you recently watched the

(01:06:57):
evening news, ABS Evening News, ABC Evening News? Like once
in a while, I might. I've tried the news. I
watched the morning news. I do. I do watch the
morning news to find out like the weather or hey,
these roads are going to be closed in DC or whatever.
I do watch the morning news. But for the most part,
like when you watch the evening news, one of the

(01:07:19):
interesting things you see is commercials for medication. It's like,
literally every single commercials for medication. Why is that? It's
because the only people who watch the news are old people.

Speaker 1 (01:07:36):
Enough, the only people well, you know, that's one of
the reasons I don't watch mainstream news or televised news,
because it's it's ninety percent commercials and advertising and maybe
ten percent of actual content, you.

Speaker 2 (01:07:49):
Know, probably less than that, right, I think I'm gonna
say in ten minutes of commercials, I'm gonna say it
seems like every.

Speaker 1 (01:07:56):
Time I'm watching it, I run into like, you know,
ten commercials in a row, and then all of a
sudden they talk for thirty seconds. It's another ten commercials.
It's almost as bad as watching an NFL game sometimes.

Speaker 2 (01:08:05):
So you have another issue that you kind of run into,
is you have with the Internet. You have this hyper
specialization when it comes to viewing content. So if you
see someone's opinion and you like that opinion, well they're

(01:08:26):
going to show you more things that are associated with
that because they want to keep your eyeballs on you know,
they want to keep your eyeballs on the on the screen. Absolutely.

Speaker 1 (01:08:38):
Well, since we're talking about this, it's I've seen it
with and I know you've seen it because you've been
doing this longer than I have. I just started getting
into video right and utilizing YouTube and rumble and whatnot.
And what I've noticed is the difference between my audio
podcasts and what works on YouTube are two different things.
I could throw a two hour interview on YouTube and

(01:08:59):
get almost views, but I've turned into a bunch of
shorts and all. It's like you've got thousands of Look,
I'm like what because people can't get past thirty seconds,
and even within those thirty seconds for like they if
they stick around for fifteen of those some can't, right,
But in general, you know, I know, generalizing, but it
just seems like everybody has a very short attention spans
when it comes to video content. I've noticed anyway. So

(01:09:23):
it's like I could have a two hour episode on
a conversation on a podcast audio format that does extremely well,
but then in video format it seems like everybody just
wants to get right to it. It's like, where's the
short at I want to see these little clips. They
don't want to go through the whole thing and really
take it. In the majority, I'm not saying all, but
the majority, So I've noticed the difference. It's it's it's

(01:09:43):
it's crazy. And again, different audiences too, right, Maybe maybe
people asn't audio or just an older generation of people
that are used to just wanting to hear those long conversations,
But it seems like the younger people or the newer
generations are like, nope, I want to quick, I want
to fast, I want to the point and I'm done.
I want to move on now. That's what seems like
that that's my opinion anyway, from my perspective. Yeah, So, uh, Ukraine,

(01:10:08):
what's going on.

Speaker 2 (01:10:09):
Man, Well, we're about to us our time box, but
I know, let's keep We're.

Speaker 1 (01:10:14):
Getting there, but before before we go, I wanted to
get your opinion on what's going on with a sudden
shift to send Ukraine weapons and support when Trump was
against it or seemed to be no.

Speaker 2 (01:10:27):
Honestly, I don't think that was President Trump. I think
that was uh crap. I can't remember his name. I
think there are some people in the d O D.
I can't remember the specific guy's name, but he's a
big China hawk, and I think that was him. And
when Trump kind of realized what had happened, that this
happened without his authority, I think he uh kind of

(01:10:49):
put the kabash on that real quick. Albridge Colby, what's
the guy's name, Elbridge Colby. He's a big we need
to be ready to fight China guy. He's not wrong,
but we can. We can do both. And kind of
the scary thing here, The thing I've mentioned is that
by supporting Ukraine, we are deterring China because we were

(01:11:13):
saying we're gonna stand with our allies no matter what.
So China, if you decide to take Taiwan, you're gonna
have a.

Speaker 1 (01:11:19):
Bad day, right, And that was definitely in question for
a while. Wouldn't we stand on the Hunter allies? It
seemed like we wouldn't. But I mean we've definitely turned
that corner and showed the world that we build.

Speaker 2 (01:11:30):
Well. One of the one of the huge issues is
that there are a finite amount of weapons. We burned
through a lot of interceptors. We burned through a lot
of interceptors in Israel, and I think Lockie Raytheon has
the capability of manufacturing five hundred and fifty factories per year.

(01:11:53):
It's not a lot, right, No, And you know, I'd
love to say, like, well, we should, we should fund
that more, right, we should. We should put more money
into developing missiles, should hire more people working at these factories.
And that's great, But who's going to pay for that? Right?
I agreed?

Speaker 1 (01:12:13):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:12:15):
So, so you know, in some ways, like maybe one
of the solutions is maybe we need to look at
a less expensive interceptor, right that has eighty percent of
the capabilities. Right, Like I'm surprised andrel hasn't worked on

(01:12:36):
something like that. Like here's this thing, here's this new
missile we developed, It's one hundred and fifty thousand each
week and make ten thousand of them. It'll fit on
the pack three launcher and it has eighty percent of
the capabilities of the Patriot.

Speaker 1 (01:12:48):
Is is supporting Ukraine with munitions enough? I mean, do
you do you think because we first talked about this,
and I think when you and I first talked was
like back in January or so and so, do you
think that at this point just giving them munitions and

(01:13:08):
money is enough? Are we ever going to get to
the point where you think we may have to actually
get involved with real troops to push back on Russia
just because there's such a much I mean, there's just
a much bigger country. You know, it's a little different
than the Israel Iran situation we're looking at. Russia is
just so much bigger and has so many more capabilities,
you know, at least depth anyway, right depth. So do

(01:13:31):
you think we'll ever come to that or we'll just
the support of munitions be enough?

Speaker 2 (01:13:36):
All Ukraine has ever wanted was weapons, Like they haven't
asked for any troops, they haven't asked for anyone to
come to their aid. Now, could they? Could we do
something more like established the no fly zone that I
mean back when the war first started, I made a

(01:13:58):
video about that where like, look, it'd be really difficult
to establish no fly zone because we would have to
take out Russian surface stair missiles, would have to Now
kind of the question there becomes like, well, could the
UK and France establish a no fly zone? And they

(01:14:20):
might be able.

Speaker 1 (01:14:21):
To do that, That is the question actually, right, and.

Speaker 2 (01:14:23):
No fly zone would would really help Ukraine because it
essentially mean any missiles fired into ukraineould get shot down
and they have the capability. I don't know if they
have the ability to run a WAX twenty four to

(01:14:45):
seven like the United States does, and you're gonna need
those airborne warning control planes in order to detect those
incoming missiles. But yeah, I certainly think that maybe establishing
a no fly zone, at least from the European side
of the European run no fly zone, that might not

(01:15:07):
be a bad idea.

Speaker 1 (01:15:07):
So that in combination with the continued support of munitions
and money to fund this should be enough, I think. So.

Speaker 2 (01:15:16):
I mean, that's like I said, that's all they really wanted, right,
give us the weapons we need.

Speaker 1 (01:15:22):
They never called for actual troops I agree, You're correct,
they never did. I guess.

Speaker 2 (01:15:26):
I guess.

Speaker 1 (01:15:26):
The other factor is will hooting back off eventually? You know,
the longer this goes out, it goes on. But will
he eventually back off?

Speaker 2 (01:15:36):
That's that's that's a good question. I you know, his
his goal. The goal of Russia is to turn Ukraine
into a satellite state. So one of two things is
going to happen. They're either going to turn Ukraine into
a satellite state, Russia is eventually going to collapse. And

(01:15:58):
I actually believe one of the reasons that our strategy
at one point during the early administration was let's get
out of Ukraine. Let's just let Russia take it, because
then absolute nightmare scenario is what happens if Russia and
Ukraine continued to fight for the next four years, and

(01:16:20):
then China invades Taiwan, right, and then Russia collapses, and
now we have a collapse state with nuclear weapons. We
have to go secure those weapons right now. The first
time that Russia collapsed, people didn't leave their post, right
even though they weren't getting paid or they didn't really

(01:16:42):
know if they had a country anymore, they stayed by
their post and they guarded those nuclear weapons. But I
don't know if that's going to be the case if
Russia collapses to the point where you have regional warlords
who take over and you know, now they're not gonna
be able to use those nuclear weapons because all the

(01:17:05):
permissive action links are in Moscow. Right But eventually you
can take the plutonium out of there, you can give
it to another nation, they can build their own bob
eventually some of all fear style.

Speaker 1 (01:17:17):
Yeah, do you do you think do you think Russia
may be on the ridge of plausiphist does extend any
longer it keeps going.

Speaker 2 (01:17:26):
I think they could collapse mainly because you know, at
some point there's just no there, there's they're fighting their
own economy, so you know when right now.

Speaker 1 (01:17:44):
We're trying to stay ahead of it, right with this
this war.

Speaker 2 (01:17:47):
So they're paying. So they have laborers and they have soldiers,
and right now in the factories in Russia, like you
can either join the army or you get a job
at a factory, and so Russia is paying money. These
are compracti key, These are not conscripted soldiers. These guys

(01:18:07):
are being paid to join the army, and right now
they're paying them enough money that people think, well, I'm
going to roll the dice and run the risk of
joining the army for all this this fucking full of money.
And the issue is that some of the weapons manufacturing

(01:18:30):
companies they can't find workers, so they raise wages. So
now people go to the weapons manufacturing company instead of
joining the army. So the army raises wages, so then
the other companies raise wages, and they just keep raising wages.
The Army raises and the French companies raised wages. I
think twenty percent of Russia's economy is geared towards the
war right now. And you know, one of the scary

(01:18:53):
parts I've said is that if you turn that off,
that's going to be a big problem because you can't
just let's say Russia wins the war, right if they
don't have a soft landing with their economy. There's going
to be a huge issue, a massive issue, because you

(01:19:16):
have all these people who they had a job one
day and now they don't have a job, and maybe
demobilize soldiers, and these soldiers they come back and yeah,
they have a bunch of money that only lasts so long,
right then they might drink it all a way. Eventually

(01:19:36):
people You know, when you have a society and you
just taught all these people how to use guns and
they come back to their job, what happens, Well, people
like that have always figured out how to get a gun.
And Russia's gun laws are not the same as the
United States, but you can buy a gun. So I

(01:19:58):
think that's the kind of the nightmare scenario for Russia
where let's say they win, but then they kind of
lose as well because their economy collapses and we need
to the point where you can only raise wages so much. Right.
What is Russia's main export right now? Cold natural gas oil, right,

(01:20:19):
and the rest of the world can only buy so
much of that. So and a lot of their extraction
equipment is made in the West, so they can't get
spare parts for that. They also don't really have machine
tool industry. A lot of the machine tool industry is
in Germany, the Netherlands, the United States. China doesn't even
have a real machine tool industry. We see and C manufacturing.

(01:20:43):
So you're pumping oil as fast as you can for
the hard currency that can that you can use to
pay your people and buy weapons and keep this war
going that at some point you're going to reach the
limit to how much oil you can actually pump and
things breaking down so there's less oil. So right, so

(01:21:04):
they can only keep this up for so long, and
I don't know how long that's going to be, but
there is a finite limit to how long Russia can
keep pumping oil.

Speaker 1 (01:21:17):
Yeah, no, that's true. And then there's the other the
other factor as to whether or not or when do
the people start to really turn on Putin and not
support them anymore, because for the most part, most Russians do.

Speaker 2 (01:21:30):
I can tell you when if Russia ever establishes a
general conscription again, like they tried that. I want to
say it was in September of twenty and twenty two.
Russia did a general mobilization and the people hated it
because there's always been this deal between Moscow, Saint Petersburg

(01:21:54):
and Russian politicians, which is, do whatever the hell you
want to, just don't touch our kids. Right, So, as
long as the elite in Saint Petersburg and Moscow aren't
being sent to the front lines, do whatever the heck
you want. But the second your kids are being sent
to the front lines, that's that's an issue, and that's
where you get to actually see real change. You know,

(01:22:16):
right now, the whole, the whole thing is being funded
by taxes on these Russian oligarchs. They can't possibly enjoy
those high taxes. They want to live in their mansion
and buy their football teams in England and stuff, right right,
that's not really good for them either.

Speaker 1 (01:22:32):
All right, well, I think we're at your time here.
I'd love to keep talking to it. I can't keep
you forever, so I appreciate that. Oh yeah, I want to.
I want to thank you for coming back on man,
and I'll see you in touch with you, but it's
always informative and I like talking to you, so appreciate it.
And you know, hopefully we talk again soon. I know

(01:22:52):
you're a very busy guy though.

Speaker 2 (01:22:54):
Thank you so much.

Speaker 1 (01:22:56):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:23:00):
Dot doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo
do